Thursday, November 29, 2007

This is a piece of a slide show at the International Herald Tribune which illustrates the point noted by Patrick Poole in his FrontPageMag.com article The Parisian Intifada and “The Project” which can be seen here.

And a funny new arabic word has come into my vocabulary: muqawama, the doctrine of constant combat.

Here's another picture from the slide show, this one of a smoldering public library in Paris. Infidel libraries have been a target of the Muslims from the beginning, since the rightly-guided Caliph Omar commanded the final destruction of the library of Alexandria as a part of his conquest of Coptic Egypt in 640 A.D. "The contents of those books," said he, "are in conformity with the Koran, or they are not. If they are, the Koran is sufficient without them; if they are not, they are pernicious. Let them, therefore, be destroyed." Hence, the precious and irreplaceable papyrus and palm leaf manuscripts kept there were burned by the clever Muslims to heat the public baths for themselves over a period of six months. That library, created at the instigation of Alexander the Great, was the vast storehouse and repository of the assembled knowledge of thousands of years of Western and Mediterranean civilization, from the pharaohs to Archimedes to St. Jerome and beyond.

Omar's cultural descendants are here, today, doing the same work. Mr. Poole lays it out in the context of the "Project" of the Muslim Brotherhood:

1) Muqawama, whether in Israel or in the West, is seen as part of the larger global jihad;2) Little emphasis is placed on territory;3) Death is seen as an advantage;4) Battle is almost (always) conducted amongst civilians.

The French intifada is taking place not only in the heart of France, but in the heart of Europe itself. Much like the 9/11 attacks that were directed at the financial and political centers of America, both symbolically and really, the constant campaign of violence by Muslims throughout Europe are intended to extend the global jihad to the deepest centers of the West. But rather than confront the West militarily, the battle against Western civilization that they have already enjoined is going to take place in the banlieues, not the battlefield. Various instruments of violence are being used, ranging from crime, rioting, and as we see in Paris today, urban warfare. Terrorism is currently used only occasionally to initiate peak periods, but we can expect its increased use as the conflict continues.

The difficulty for us on the working end of the “Civilization-Jihadist Process” is that our leaders have steadfastly refused to understand the nature of the threat and the interrelation between what is happening in Paris, France and Khandahar, Afghanistan. While different methodologies are being used, the endgame is still the same: the establishment of the global caliphate through jihad. We must come to terms with strategy and operations of radical Islam in the West, the manner in which they manage conflict, and realize the immanent nature of the threat already in our midst – a lesson the French are learning first-hand.

Until we do, the strategic planning of the forces of the global jihad, as expressed in “The Project” and other Muslim Brotherhood planning documents, will continue to meet with unimpeded success.

Thursday, November 22, 2007

Daniel Larison writing in the recent on-line issue of The American Conservative makes some trenchant and crucial points with respect to the terms "Islamofascism" and "Islamophobia" in his recent article. A sample:

Like the perjorative term from which it derives, Islamofascism means whatever the person deploying it wants it to mean. It is ultimately not an attempt at description or explanation but a demon word designed to generate visceral, irrational reaction. This is precisely the opposite of the careful, deliberate, and informed responses we need to cultivate. And since it obscures the actual nature of jihadism, it is not simply a crime against the English language but a dangerous source of misunderstanding.

“Islamophobia” is a word favored by both jihadist apologists and the conventional enforcers of “tolerance” and opponents of “hate speech.” Attributing acts of violence to Islam, criticizing practices in Islamic countries, or even associating the name of Islam with crimes carried out in its name draw the charge. It, like other thought-policing labels, is a tool for defining the limits of speech and shutting down critical thinking while securing select groups from reasonable inquiry and political opposition. The term implies irrational fear and loathing and classes an entire perspective as nothing more than hatred, denying to critics of jihadism their rationality and so denigrating them as being less than fully human. Control of debate, indeed, control over whether there will even be a debate, is the goal.

"Term Limits", the title of his article, is a rather unfortunate choice of words, as it is intended to be a witty means of describing the way the terms of the debate over Islam serve to limit the scope and direction of that debate. Thinking instead that it was referring to a tired issue pertaining to domestic office-holders, I almost skipped the article entirely. I'm glad I didn't.

Sunday, October 28, 2007

For those of you who don't read Power Line, this may be one reason why you should. While there are philosophical and historical reasons why we shouldn't be in Iraq, there are temporal reasons why its good that we are at this time. John H. at Power Line neatly summarizes a few of them.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

I've had a crush on Nico from the from the time I was 15 or 16 years old. Hers is a fascinating story, but ultimately culminating in her accidental death in 1988 at age 50 on the island of Ibiza where she had lived off and on. I prefer not to think about her long and tawdry descent into a heroin addiction. Images of her from those times look as though her soul has spilled out of her eyes and on to the floor into a shrinking puddle of muddy pond water. Here, though, on one of my favorites, she is bright-eyed, vulnerable and sexy as hell. Like I remember her.

Blogger won't let me do a link within a video upload, so for more on Nico, paste this into your browser: http://smironne.free.fr/NICO/bio.html

Saturday, October 13, 2007

According to an official statement: "This is the first time that the Empire State Building will be illuminated for Eid, and the lighting will become an annual event in the same tradition of the yearly lightings for Christmas and Hannukah."

Another word that comes to mind would be ignominious. In strict muslim societies only muslims are allowed to wear green clothing as an indication of their superiority. For a non-muslim, wearing green was punishable by death. Christians and Jews were relegated to not-green and in addition had their own religion-indicating colors of clothing and mandatory cloth patches to identify them as non-muslims in the islamic heirarchy of being. This was a fashion innovation the Nazis stole and used in the 1st few years of their 1000 year reich.

Green is the symbolic color of Islam. Green was also the color of the banners used on the battlefield when conquering and enslaving our cultural ancestors, the Egyptians, the Judeans and the Greeks, and the color of the first Islamic flag. And Mohammad's turban.

Now it is for non-muslims to become the color of capitulation and cultural self-abnegation. If only we hadn't made them so angry they wouldn't have attacked the twin towers. Or something like that. Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Friday, October 12, 2007

Good news from Holland, bad news from England, in this brief comparison piece from The Gathering Storm:

"Now that Tony Blair and his hard line stance against terrorism has been removed because his stance sparked Muslim anger, now the UK pledges to work more closely with local communities to fight terrorism.

God forbid that we should take a hard line stance on those that want to kill us. But we sure don’t want to insult those that wish to impose Sharia law on us all – do we?

Tony McNulty also described the phrase "war on terror" as "crass". Naughty. Naughty.

I mean, according to liberals, what creates terrorists is not their blind devotion to jihad – but a few simple words. But on the Continent – some Dutch are not buying it.

In a joint opinion piece in newspaper De Volkskrant, Party for Freedom (PVV) leader Geert Wilders and Ehsan Jami, founder of the Committee for ex-Muslims, warned yesterday against what they see as an attempt by Islam to conquer the world. They compare the Prophet Mohammed to Adolf Hitler.

Wilders and Jami suggest that a hushing-up culture reigns in the Netherlands on Islam. They criticise National Anti-terrorism Coordinator Tjibbe Joustra, who recently warned that radical statements about Islam could give the final push to individuals poised on the edge of violence.

"We consider that Joustra should catch terrorists instead of trying to muzzle politicians," according to Wilders and Jami. "His remarks are inappropriate for this reason alone. But we also wonder whether what Joustra claims is actually true. (...) Does Joustra really think that religious maniacs who want to use violence to please Allah need Jami or Wilders as an extra spur to move into action?

Wilders and Jami refer to the 1960s and 1970s, when "Christianity and Jesus Christ were heavily insulted and criticised" in the Netherlands. (...) Did Christians then commit violence en masse? (...) Of course not. Such processes are unique to the Islamic ideology of hatred, violence and intolerance."

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Ehsan Jami, 22, founder of the Netherlands Committee for Ex-Muslims on Dutch-Islam politics:

"Sharia schools say that they will kill the ones who leave Islam. In the West people get threatened, thrown out of their family, beaten up,” Mr Jami said. “In Islam you are born Muslim. You do not even choose to be Muslim. We want that to change, so that people are free to choose who they want to be and what they want to believe in.”

"Banning something is not going to help. I am the opposite – everyone should read the Koran.”....Mr Jami is being compared to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Somali refugee who became a prominent Dutch politician campaigning for the reform of Islam but who left eventually for an academic career in the United States....speaking to the Times from a secret location.

Monday, August 20, 2007

Before Mohammad got Allah on board with Islam and fixed everything for the Arabs, none of the men and certainly none of the women, we generally assume, were Muslims; but that was much to Mohammad's chagrin. Some Egyptians have an understanding of this but can't come right out and say it. Now I'm not a huge fan of ZahiHawass, the poster boy of Eqyptian Egyptian archeology, but he's certainly not a kook and and he seems to have a genuine sense of history without all of the nagging problems that his sculpture smashing, image loathing, jahiliya-obsessed Arab and muslim co-religionists bring to the table. Jahiliya, the Arabic name for the condition that existed during all those nameless, shapeless, inchoate, blobby Pre-islamic times, when the despised religious cultures (e.g. Greek, Roman, Hebrew, Hindu, Christian, or Zoroastrian, etc., etc.) produced all manner of things vile and non-islamic. Their icons and artifacts, ignoble creations all, are to be expressly and affirmatively obliterated by muslims and forgotten. Instead, the cultural lodestone imposed by Islamic sharia law is to be nothing more, or less than the wisdom contained within the Qur'an, the hadiths and the sira of Mohammad. Because, in fact, jahiliyah still exists in the world, the utter eradication of non-Islamic culture is, ipso facto, the ultimate imperative of the Islamic global jihad.

Mohammad placed himself in the Abrahamic tradition, against the indigenous Arab polytheists of his time, as the final prophet of his tradition. Islam was sold on the basis that it was culturally superior to polytheism and its adherents were accordingly morally superior (and naturally, therefore entirely deserving of the polytheists' wives and goods). Curiously, and logically in a way, all of the sympathetic biblical figures Mohammad evoked in the Qur'an, starting with Adam and Eve, the very first man and woman, were incipient muslims, if not actually, and were thus not of the jahiliya which is said to have arisen in those geographical areas not yet touched by Islam. Even Jesus and his mother were retroactively reverted. Well now this week it was announced that fossil human footprints have been found, and in Egypt, no less, which were reputedly stomped down over two million years ago. Were they Muslim footprints? What are we to make of this? Allahu akbar. If an Islamic future doesn't seem bad enough for you, how about throwing in an Islamic history to boot that just keeps penetrating further and further into the past?

"This could go back about two million years," said Zahi Hawass, the secretary general of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities. "It could be the most important discovery in Egypt," he told Reuters.

"The question is especially apposite, because we now know the consequences for every single European society which has admitted large numbers of Muslims: social alienation, religious antagonism and outright terrorism.

We know this. We all know it. And yet we continue to allow Muslim immigration. Why? What do we gain from it? "

Saturday, August 18, 2007

Tuesday's first sighting brought devastation to the Yazidi of northern Iraq, and no doubt Allah is well pleased that Muslim lands are being so efficiently purified.

"Bodies covered by blankets could be seen laid in the street and outside a municipal building. Rescuers are still digging through the rubble of the bomb-flattened clay-built homes in scenes reminiscent of an earthquake zone.

But Major Rodger Lemons, operations officer for a US brigade in the area, which is near the city of Mosul, said that rescue efforts are winding down.

"My assessment is there’s probably no one left alive in the rubble," he said. "We’ve transitioned through to a clean-up phase."

The US military has said the "al-Qa’eda in Iraq" group is the prime suspect for the attack on the Yazidis, seen by Sunni Muslim militants as infidels.

Major Lemons said it appeared that two refuse trucks packed with explosives had been driven into each of the villages, Kahtaniya and al-Jazeera. " from this article in the Telegraph.

"From their base in a 1000-year-old former monastery at Lalish, near the northern city of Mosul, the Yazidi have kept alive traditions that date back at least to the days of the prophet Zoroaster, about 2500 years ago. ""Throughout the ages, their beliefs have mingled with the credos of their neighbours, especially Muslims." from this article in News.com.au.

Sunday, July 22, 2007

Islam’s prophet, Muhammad, found no need to explain or justify his unprovoked looting raids which suggests that the attitude of, “it’s there for the taking” and the lure of “something-for-nothing” was already well established and accepted as normal behaviour. This barbarous and predatory conduct may have, in time, changed—as it did with the Vikings— had it not been for Islam. Muhammad’s divinely sanctioned marauding of booty-laden merchant’s caravans became the imprimatur that entrenched opportunism and predation as, not only legitimate, but in fact exemplary, thereby immutably casting the die for eternity.With Islam’s belief that all is preordained, where even the most minute detail in day to day life only happens because Allah has previously willed it, (the inshallah mentality), it doesn’t require a great stretch of the imagination to conceive that, in the Muslim mind, Allah has permitted Western society to develop, succeed and prosper so as to present the “faithful” with a ready-made “walk-in-walk-out”, “under new management” takeover, complete with a functioning infrastructure and a populace steadily retreating into an ever increasing degree of subservient “dhimmitude”. -Warner MacKenzie at Islam Watch

In most historic instances before nations have been subjugated to the muslim will, the final capitulation can be shown to have been preceded by years of marauding terror raids, "razzias", and the classic contemporary example can be found in the Darfur region of the Sudan.

This week the news in Darfur is the mass re-population by moon-watching, ethnic arabs of the now abandoned homelands of the indigenous black Africans (Dar=land; fur=the fur language). Lets put that bit of predictable news into context. This piece comes from Amnesty International and dates to 2003:

"The attack took place at dawn in September 2003 when many Janjawid arrived on camels, horses and by cars. Some Arab women, on donkeys and on camels, accompanied them. The women took part in the looting. I was sleeping when the attack took place. I was taken away by the attackers in khaki and in civilians clothes, along with dozens of other girls, and had to walk for three hours. During the day, we were beaten up and the Janjawid they told us: 'you, the black women, we will exterminate you; you have no God.' We were taken to a place in the bush were the Janjawid raped us several times at night. For three days, we did not receive food and almost no water. After three days, the Janjawid had to move to another place and set us free. They told us: 'next time we come, we will exterminate you all, we will not even leave a child alive'."

So it has been throughout the history of the non-islamic world beginning with conquest of Mecca by the first muslims. Rape, pillage, burn. Strip the boys and check for pubic hair. Those without become slaves, the others and their fathers and uncles are summarily executed. The women: raped and impregnated to make them dependent on their new masters. The razzia, repeated over and over, has always been the procedural precursor to the major push. This is how Judea went down, and Mesopotamia, Egypt, Persia, India, Anatolia, North Africa, and Spain. (Indonesia may be an exception here, but my ignorance of its history doesn't permit me to hazard a guess). Sometimes the razzias were just to extract booty, and sometimes simply to destroy the livelihood of the target peoples to soften them up for later. In Judea, Syria and Anatolia (the last Asian piece of Greco-Roman-Byzantine culture), the raiding parties would burn the crops and cut down the fruit trees, which of course led to immediate (and enduring) famine, untold suffering and eventual depopulation, not to mention de-forestation and ruination of the land. Conversion to islam under those circumstances would mean a chance at physical salvation (but also living life under Sharia law). Thus did islam move into the West at its margins.

I have been meaning to blog something on razzias through history for a while and their connections to current events, but didn't get around to it until MacKenzie's fine article gave me a bit of a kick in the pants. His piece also touches upon a related topic that really interests me: how the rich, and hugely productive Middle-eastern and North African agricultural regions of the Greco-Roman world were largely turned into deserts by the muslims, and are only now, under western influence, slowly beginning to recover.

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

I have cribbed the following post in its entirety from the Pedestrian Infidel site, as I could not find a quick way to yank it out separately and link to it...This expresses many of my own thoughts regarding islam as my thinking has evolved over the past few years. Most people simply don't get the sense of desperation those of us in the anti-jihad movement feel as we watch the history of islam repeat itself in our own day. But history can be on our side this time if only we can create for ourselves, as a civilization, the tools which are there to be crafted that can defeat this scourge....Thanks to Mark Alexander for putting this down.

Stop the Islamization of Europe! Stop the Islamization of the West!

The West is being Islamized before our very eyes! It is happening in such subtle ways that it is sometimes imperceptible to those who are not looking out for it. But much of the time, what is happening is plain to see. Each and every concession we make to Muslims is a further nail in the coffin of liberal democracy. Each time we consider granting Muslims a public holiday, each time we consider curtailing our own freedom of speech to appease them, we are assisting Muslims to further Islamize our home countries. Be sure of that.

Western governments should not be powerless to deal with this, but even so they seem to be: They lack the will and determination to stop the rot.

Political correctness, of course, has taken its toll on the West. So has the ridiculous concept of multiculturalism. Add to this a deep-seated guilt complex, a pervasive attitude of self-denigration, extreme tolerance, and an army of apologists for Islam, and we have a catastrophe in the making.

One of our greatest mistakes is to think of Islam as just another one of the world's great religions. We shouldn't. Islam is politics or it is nothing at all, but, of course, it is politics with a spiritual dimension, politics all wrapped up in a deity.

What is the nature of the politics of Islam? Well, that's an easy one to answer: It is little different from the politics of a totalitarian state, little different from the ideologies of Nazism or communism, different only in detail rather than style. Both Nazism and communism used the purge to try and 'cleanse' society of what it considered undesirable. Islam always does the same. Both of those tolerated only a single political party. Islam generally does the same, and certainly, where it doesn't, insists that all parties be Islamic ones. This, of course, gives the establishment the power to coerce the people. G. H. Sabine, in his book, A History of Political Theory, tells us this about Nazism and communism:

...the party was a self-constituted aristocracy which has the mission partly of leading, partly of instructing, and partly of coercing the bulk of mankind along the road that it must follow. Both were totalitarian in the sense that they obliterated the liberal distinction between areas of private judgment and of public control, and both turned the educational system into an agency of universal indoctrination. In their philosophy[,] both were utterly dogmatic, professing, the one in the name of the Aryan race and the other in the name of the proletariat, a higher insight capable of laying down rules for art, literature, science, and religion. Both induced a frame of mind akin to religious fanaticism. In strategy[,] both were reckless in their assertions, boundless in their claims, abusive toward their opponents, prone to regard any concession on their own part as a temporary expedient and on a rival's part as a sign of weakness. The social philosophies of both agreed in regarding society as in essence a system of forces, economic or racial, between which adjustment takes place by struggle and dominance rather than by mutual understanding and concession. Both therefore regarded politics as merely an expression of power.

So much in Islam resembles those two despicable ideologies. The ruling party in Islamic countries coerces the people along the road that it must follow. This is particularly easy to observe in Iran today. Islam, too, tries to obliterate the liberal distinction between areas of private judgment and of public control. We see this in all Islamic countries. Similar to Nazism and communism, Islam also turns the educational system into an apparatus of the state for the purpose of universal indoctrination. One would be justified in using the term 'brainwashing'.

In addition, Islam also lays down rules for art (no depiction of the human form is allowed, for example), for literature (all is censored), for science (nothing discovered may contradict the Qur'an or Ahadith, or the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad), and certainly for religion (no religion is accepted of man except Islam). Where Jews and Christians live in Islamic countries, they are given protection in return for a high tax known as the jiziyah, but are given dhimmi status, which means, in effect, that they are subdued and given second class status.

Islam also induces a frame of mind akin to fanaticism. That this is so is self-explanatory. Islam is also reckless in its assertions, and boundless in its claims. Example: All the world belongs to Allah; therefore it is the duty of all Muslims to Islamize it. In Islam, too, adjustment takes place by struggle and dominance. Note the Jihad.

A remarkable similarity is this: Islam is also inclined to be abusive to its opponents (they are infidels and unclean), and is prone to regard any concession on its own part as a temporary expedient and on a rival's part as a sign of weakness. And Islam, too, regards politics as an expression of power. Oh, and we shouldn't forget that Islam is profoundly anti-Semitic!

Aren't the similarities just remarkable?

What is troubling is this: Islam is closing in on us. We have so many unassimilated Muslims living in Europe, and an ever-growing number living in the States, too. In fact, millions and millions of Muslims live in the West today. But the West has no strategy for dealing with the fall-out. We saw this recently in France when their cities burnt night after night. The mayhem Muslim immigrants caused there was enough to make anyone's hair stand on end. But what has France done about it? It has unveiled a series of measures to appease the Muslim immigrants, and has ignored the fact that this was an uprising caused in no small part by the Islamic community flexing its ever strengthening muscles. Now, however, we have some hope of change: after all, Nicholas Sarkozy has been elected Président de la Republique.

If we in the West wish to ensure the survival of our own civilization, wish to ensure that our children will be able to live as freely as we have been able to do till now, wish to ensure that people are free to choose their religion in the West, but just as free not to choose one, then we have a lot of thinking to do!

I would suggest that we start by asking one simple question: Should we regard Islam as a mere religion, or should we start to see it for what it truly is: a political ideology with megalomaniacal aspirations; a political ideology with a spiritual dimension which will stop at nothing until the West is no more, until the West has been brought into Dar ul Islam, or the 'House of Islam', until the West has been well and truly Islamized. To ignore this fact is tantamount to playing fast and loose with our children's future freedoms and security. In fact, it is negligent of their future well-being!

Monday, May 28, 2007

Robert Spencer observes that the western literati have completely lost it. Armies are, of course, obsolete, declasse, and anachronistic. That force of will and steely acts of men-at-arms might be necessary and honorable in their own right is but (temporarily, I hope) a distasteful memory best not memorialized. Of course, all of history has been made for our benefit, for there to be loft condos and granite countertops, and the trophy child and the retirement plan, and preening "pride" festivals and womens' studies, and Richard Brautigan novels, and the little dinner parties and the on-line shopping, and social justice, and arts-on-the-avenue and the lattes, and the nanny and the nanny-state. But no winners and no losers and no army recruiting either, please; its just so--so violent.

And my sentiments... well, there is a quote by General George Patton, paraphrased, that states: We ought not mourn people like those who died, but instead, thank God that they lived.

Sunday, May 20, 2007

This interesting recruiting post comes to us courtesy the estimable website Internet Haganah, probably sourced out of an African or European Jihadist website. Internet Haganah performs an invaluable service in monitoring the Arabic jihad websites for sensory indications that somewhere out there there are people who have designs on upsetting our complacency.

A lot of nice people here in the USA think that if you notice things like this, it's racist behavior for sure. If you try to draw conclusions or suggest there might really be something going on, something that our hapless president didn't create or cause, or plan in advance, why, that's insane.

What I find particularly interesting about this item is the expression "He who misses this war". Why is it that the al-Qaida guys tend always to know what war they're fighting in and recruiting for, but we don't? Could it be that what we consider to be wars, they consider to be merely battles? The last I heard, al-Qaida was operating in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Algeria, and lately in Arab occupied Judea and Lebanon. Probably lots of other places, too, including here in the USA. The U.S. Congress, however, is quite busy with the "War in Iraq", squaring it off and drawing bright lines and such with great emphasis and nodding amongst themselves. Wait 'til they find out it's only been a battle for position.

Wednesday, May 02, 2007

One of my favorite subjects...the pre-islamic identities of the conquered muslim subject. Here this notion is discussed in some detail. The comments are worth scrolling down .

North Africa was the granary of imperial Rome and one of the most fertile and productive agricultural regions in the world--until the conquering Arab muslims got their hands on it. The Berbers are a native population of Libya and North Africa, who were deeply influenced by the Phoenicians who were the founders of the remarkable city-state of Carthage. The Berbers are still there. The seafaring and Semitic Phoenicians were originally from the East coast of the Mediterranean, today's Lebanon and northern Israel.

It is a hopeful sign when we see the victims of Arab-islamic imperialism defiantly pushing back while firmly grounded in their own history.

Friday, February 23, 2007

Since one of my interests is in trying to understand how muslims might learn to throw off their muslim identity (the "Ummah") and retrieve and restore the native culture that underlies the nearly impermeable islamic outer shell they live in, I found this DhimmiWatch post very interesting.